T

he AGO said Thursday it would file a judicial review with the Guernsey Supreme Court, after its appeal to freeze 36 million euros (US$50 million) claimed by Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra had been rejected by the court.

Assistant attorney general for state administrative affairs Edwin Pamimpin Situmorang said in a press conference here Thursday that his side would firstly study the Supreme Court's ruling favoring Tommy, the former president Soeharto's youngest son, and seek new evidence for its request for review.

The Attorney General's Office (AGO) will hold a meeting directly presided over by Attorney General Hendarman Supandji to discuss the case, including the deadline for filing the request for review.

Tommy and the government have been in a tug-o-war since Banque Nationale de Paris (BNP) Paribas on Guernsey Island froze 36 million euros (around US$48 million) of funds belonging to Tommy's Garnet Investment Co., with the bank suspecting that the money may have been sourced from corrupt practices in Indonesia.

Disappointed with the bank's decision, Tommy took the case to the island's district court, which later issued a verdict in favor of the bank.

The court also asked the Indonesian government to prove early allegations about the origin of the funds.

The battle then entered its second round as Tommy filed an appeal to the higher court and subsequently won because the Indonesian government could not convince the court the funds were sourced illegally.

Following this decision, the Indonesian government, through the AGO, then filed an appeal to the Privy Council in London, in hopes the council would see the case from different perspective.

The council, however, supported the court's appeal verdict in favor of Tommy.

Commenting on this, Yoseph Suardi Sabda, one of prosecutors who attended the trial both in Guernsey and London, said the panel had gone over the line when it stated it could not issue a ruling in favor of the government because they had obtained no evidence that Tommy had never been punished for graft in Indonesia.

"It is not fair to see this case that way. We faced different problems here," Yoseph told The Jakarta Post on Thursday.

However, the AGO would address the panel's consideration in its request for judicial review, he said.

"The panel's decision was biased and unfair, and this will be our entry point in filing for a review," Yoseph said.

However, Febry Diansyah of Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) said the court's verdict was justifiable.

"How can we expect somebody else to find Tommy guilty when our own government has failed to bring him to court for corruption and graft. It doesn't make sense," Febry said, adding that the court's verdict was a slap in the face for the government and the AGO.